Forum
« 2-family to 1-family Pocket Door Hardware »
July 12, 2006
Do I have any recourse?
Sorry for the duplicate post - forgot to allow comments.
I just found out that Mets owner Fred Wipon and his development group Sterling Properties plans to convert the garage on College Place in Brooklyn Heights into high-end condos. I recently bought an apartment in the co-op that is adjacent to the property and needless to say, I'm peeved. My building found about the project because a surveyor was snooping around with a measuring device in my neighbor's garden downstairs and when she asked him what he was doing, he said that he was working on a condo development project. Sneaky, sneaky. Sounds like they've already gone pretty far with planning, but they still need to make it through the Landmark committee since the building is landmarked. My question is this - currently there are no windows on the side of the garage that faces our building. It's a beautiful brick wall covered with ivy, about 10-20 yards back from my building. My hunch is that in order to convert the buildings into condos, they would need to put windows into these walls (on top of the inevitable noise pollution resulting from the construction, this is the part that kills me). But can they cut windows into the exterior of a landmarked building? Is there a way the residents of my building can try to get at least this aspect of the construction blocked by the landmark committee? Any thoughts would be much appreciated.
Comments
Generally I think windows would not be allowed if they are right on the lot line. Are you sure the building itself is landmarked or is it just that it is in a landmark district? Given the experience of Shahn (Cambridge Place reno fame) LPC seems to take rear renovations as seriously as front ones. That said, welcome to NYC, where things change. I didn't really hear anything in your description of events which led me to conclude that anyone was being "sneaky." Also this wall is 20-30 yards (60-90 feet) from your building? Doesn't sound that intrusive. But of course I want the vacant lots and unoccupied buildings in my neighborhood to be developed...
Posted by: Putnam-denizen at July 13, 2006 8:56 AM
I think they can
Posted by: Anonymous at July 13, 2006 10:28 AM
What parking garage?
Yes, you may have an issue since those garages are not landmarked, but are in a landmarked district. Windows can be added. If I'm guessing correctly as to the garage and your bldg, those additional windows wouldn't be a real issue (don't they overlook your bldg's backyard?).
While I'm not for more condos, I'm not so sure what they are doing that is so sneaky.
Posted by: Anonymous at July 13, 2006 11:00 AM
Does this mean the College Place garage(s) are closing or is it just one building? Aside from the condo issue, if all or even part of the garages close then the non-existent parking in the Heights will get even more difficult.
Posted by: Ed Costello at July 13, 2006 1:27 PM
What I thought was sneaky was how the surveyor was walking around my neighbor's backyard to get the measurements. As far as I know, that's trespassing.
The garages are owned by Mets owner Fred Wilpon through his property group Sterling Equities. It's my understanding that the garages will close, though when it will happen remains to be seen.
I am all for cleaning up College Place, as the garages really take away from the beauty of both Love Lane and College Pl (I'm sure the owners of all those beautiful carriage houses on the lane would agree), but I still don't want to lose the lovely view I have out my back windows of the garage's brick facade covered in ivy. Maybe I'm spoiled by not having any rear neighbors, but I wish it could stay that way. Nevermind the noise that will result from the construction.
Posted by: anon at July 13, 2006 4:52 PM
Thinking about it now, it's more like 30 feet back from my building.
Posted by: Anonymous at July 13, 2006 4:55 PM
Wow that's terrible. Condos going up next to your condo. How awful. What is this city coming to? And tearing down a garage to do this? Quick, call the mayor's office.
Posted by: Anonymous at July 13, 2006 9:14 PM
I'm not sure what the gripe is with a new development? The existing garage should benefit the developer and remove any anxiety of losing a parking space in your hood.
The only landmark issue would be the front facade, but the argument can be easily resolved with some creative approach.
I don't understand the fashionable trend of communities up in arms about development. I mean, if you ask DDD about development you'll get a response: If it's not unconstitutional.
That is an acceptable objective response, and not like your self-referential interests whether a condo is being built in the hood. I mean, are you not an owner of a unit?
Even the law mentions that your innocent before proven guilty. So what that he entered your neighbors yard. I'm sure it wasn't to cause harm. I think your neighbor should reward you for your auxilary duties.
There are other more frightening issues to cuupy your time protesting, like political corruption, crime and anything else that is not emotionally attached
Posted by: Anonymous at July 18, 2006 12:51 PM
The existing garages will be town down. Currently around 400 cars are parked in the garages, so they'll either have to get rid of their car(s), park on the street, or bribe one of the remaining garages.
See this Daily News article from yesterday: http://www.nydailynews.com/08-14-2006/boroughs/story/443190p-373275c.html
Sterling Equities is listed as the developer pushing the condos, they have owned the properties since the mid-1980s according to propertyshark.
Posted by: Ed Costello at August 15, 2006 3:01 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.